Hi, I'm Tonus

[Aractus]

I was thinking more of the original writings that would eventually become the Bible. As I understand it, they're mostly a collection of historical texts in the manner of the time that they were written, which is to say that they are myths and allegorical tales that were designed to help them cope with their past and present. They were influenced greatly by politics and culture, and thus were modified and expanded upon over time. The idea that people today take those books as literal truth, whole or in part, when the original writers did not is a fascinating concept to me.

If you have clear evidence of this I'd like to see it. As it is, your view is they were "modified and expanded". I think that's largely nonsense. Especially with the discovery of the DSS - you have an Isaiah Scroll that is 2nd century BC that shows the MT text in the Leningrad Codex has not been deliberately altered since that time.

Once the various writings were selected and assembled into what we have now, further modification could not be attempted on the scale that it was during the ages when those stories and histories were first being written or changed. Even so, minor changes like the change the JWs make to the NT can have profound effect. For example, their change to John 1:1 is used to reinforce their teaching that Jesus and Jehovah are two separate beings, whereas many Christian denominations consider them to be the same person. That's a significant change, IMO.

That's not a change, that's a translation. Either translation of text is valid (God/"a god"), the translator needs to decide upon which version is preferable. The NWT was written by translators who's doctrine makes them deny the deity of Christ, hence the only option that makes sense to them is "a god". So it's an indication of poor translation, but it's not an "alteration". The problems with the NWT are not that the text was altered to suit Jehovah's Witnesses (except the name of God as you mention below). The problem is that it was translated with bias, which alters the meaning of some of the text when translated - including John 1:1.

Their inclusion of the name Jehovah in the NT also gives a different impression of the import given to god over Jesus by early Christians, which they use to reinforce their decision to worship Jehovah instead of Jesus.

Well the NT writers didn't write the Tetragrammaton - although they could have easily if they had wanted to. That reason alone is a reason not to change the text.